# Foundation Fit Analysis

Compares a foundation's stated priorities and giving history against your program to score fit and flag mismatches before you invest time in a full proposal. Use it before adding a funder to your pipeline or before a letter of inquiry.

## Prompt

## Context
You are helping a nonprofit development professional evaluate whether a specific foundation is worth pursuing. The organization is [ORGANIZATION NAME], a [ORGANIZATION TYPE] that serves [POPULATION SERVED] in [GEOGRAPHIC AREA]. The program being assessed for fit is [PROGRAM NAME], which aims to [PROGRAM GOAL]. The development staff member will use this analysis to decide whether to invest time in a proposal or letter of inquiry.

## Task
Analyze the fit between [ORGANIZATION NAME]'s program and [FUNDER NAME] using the information provided below.

Funder information (guidelines, past grants, website language):
[FUNDER INFORMATION]

Program description and budget summary:
[PROGRAM DESCRIPTION AND BUDGET]

Produce:
1. A fit score on a simple three-level scale: Strong Fit, Possible Fit, or Poor Fit. State it in the first sentence.
2. The three strongest alignment points, each in one sentence, tied to specific funder language.
3. The two or three clearest mismatches or gaps, stated plainly.
4. A verdict on whether to pursue, and at what priority level, in two sentences.
5. One specific thing to learn before making a final go or no-go decision.

## Standards
- Under 400 words. Structured with the sub-heads above.
- Cite specific funder language when naming alignment points. Use quotation marks.
- Do not invent grant history, stated priorities, asset figures, or giving ranges. Work only from the information provided.
- Flag any gap where the funder information was silent on something relevant.
- Tone is direct. This is a decision tool, not a cheerleading document.
- Do not promise the program will receive funding. A strong fit means it is worth pursuing, nothing more.
- If any key piece of funder information is missing or ambiguous, ask before completing the analysis.

## Variables

- ORGANIZATION NAME
- ORGANIZATION TYPE
- POPULATION SERVED
- GEOGRAPHIC AREA
- PROGRAM NAME
- PROGRAM GOAL
- FUNDER NAME
- FUNDER INFORMATION
- PROGRAM DESCRIPTION AND BUDGET

## Input checklist

- [ ] Funder's current guidelines or RFP, not last year's version, pulled from the funder's own website
- [ ] A sample of the funder's recent grants (from their 990, website, or news releases) covering at least two years
- [ ] Your program description including population, geography, activities, and budget range
- [ ] Remove any donor, beneficiary, or client personal data from your program materials before pasting, or confirm your AI tool is approved under your organization's data policy
- [ ] Note any personal connection or prior relationship your organization has with this funder

## Verification checklist

- [ ] Confirm every alignment point cites funder language you actually supplied, not language the AI invented or assumed
- [ ] Check that no grant amounts, asset figures, or giving history appear in the output that were not in the information you provided
- [ ] Verify the fit score matches your own read when you weigh the same evidence
- [ ] Confirm the mismatches section does not understate real problems to make the fit look better than it is
- [ ] Check that the verdict does not promise funding or use hedged language that creates false confidence
- [ ] If the AI flagged information gaps, confirm those gaps are real before proceeding to a proposal

## Sample output

Sample output. Generated by AI from sample inputs:

**Fit score: Possible Fit**

The Hartfield Foundation's current cycle offers real alignment on population and geography, but the program budget sits above their typical range and one eligibility question needs an answer before this is worth a full proposal investment.

**Three strongest alignment points**
1. Hartfield's guidelines state they prioritize "workforce preparation for adults with barriers to employment" - exactly the population Riverside Youth Coalition's Bridge to Work program serves.
2. Their recent grants page shows three awards in the $40,000 to $60,000 range to workforce programs in Crestwood County, which is your service area.
3. Their 2024 guidelines specifically call out "earned credential attainment" as a desired outcome. Your program includes industry certifications as a graduation requirement.

**Mismatches and gaps**
1. Your requested amount of $85,000 exceeds every workforce grant visible in their recent history. Their largest recent workforce award was $62,000.
2. Hartfield's guidelines require applicants to have received at least one prior grant from a local community foundation. It is unclear whether your 2022 Crestwood Community Foundation award meets this requirement.
3. The guidelines are silent on whether they fund direct service staff salaries. Your budget is 68% personnel. This is a real risk.

**Verdict**
This funder is worth one more research step, not a full proposal yet. The population and geographic alignment are genuine, but the budget gap and the salary question could disqualify the application before it is read.

**One thing to learn first**
Call or email the Hartfield program officer to confirm whether the prior community foundation grant requirement is met by your 2022 award, and ask directly whether they fund staff salaries.

## Customization notes

If you are evaluating fit for a capital campaign rather than a program grant, replace the program description variable with a project description including the capital ask. For government grant fit analysis, add the NOFA or RFP eligibility requirements as a separate variable. When reviewing a funder with a rolling application window, note in Context that timing is flexible so the verdict focuses on fit rather than calendar urgency.

---

From The Nonprofit Grant & Fundraising Library at vetslearn.com/libraries/nonprofit